VSAtrader / Socrates discussion

[frugi]

... but your ideas are obsolete. What you do not understand is that these ideas of yours applied in the 1920's and the 1930's, they are largely irrelevant in todays huge globalised markets.

A few carats to munch there.

 

[Over the Top]

what for. are you the internet police now?

this thread is in the foyer - so its not some special serious area - just a place for a giggle with out the usual over heavy handed censorship. if you have better things to do than moderate, then please go ahead and do them.

Excellently put charliechan.

Moderation is a thankless task. As it should be. After all, moderators choose to moderate for their own gratifications and satisfactions. Maybe not just power and control in all cases, but it does manifest itself that way plainly in some.

Maybe if all the moderators got together and decided what else they wanted in the guidelines for the site it would be easier. They could decide between them what they want from the site on any given day, time of day, direction of wind and prevailing whim of the moment. Prospective registrants to the site could then wade through the hundreds of pages of restrictive, prescriptive pronouncements of what the moderators feel is 'of use' or 'of interest' or 'entertaining' and decide for themselves if reading, let alone posting on such a site was worth the trouble of registering.

The need for guidelines is clear and should be adhered to in all cases. It is that the vast majority of post deletions, threats of and actual thread closures and even some member bannings appear to be quite outside the remit of the moderators based on the published guidelines.

It would be far better for all concerned, moderators and members alike if the moderators either backed off their heavy-handed censorial approach to moderating these boards and stuck to the guidelines in execution of their role or made the guidelines comprehensively cover their particular personal requirements as and when they change from moment to moment.

 

[dbphoenix]

A few carats to munch there.

Which you may munch if you like. But there's no evidence to suggest that trader behavior has changed since the era in which these principles were explored by Wyckoff, Livermore et al (and which were lifted by Williams, whom Socrates quotes so freely in the other thread, though primarily those quotes which focus on ridicule, derision, and the general condescension toward anyone who isn't Williams or Socrates, as the case may be).

Whatever "diamonds" there may be in the other thread are in plain view, and could have been discussed were it not for the superciliousness which descends like a wet blanket over most any thread which attracts Socrates' attention. Since Socrates has done his best to drive away those few who might polish them up a bit, they may well just sit there, in which case Socrates will be free to go on further about how stupid everyone is.

But have a nice day, anyway.

--Db

 

[Over the Top]

Based on the title of this thread and as I am interested in volume spread analysis, I did a search and found the tradeguider site. In one of their webinars, they do make specific mention to Wyckoff as the basic starting point for the development of their product/system. So I agree with your position dbphoenix. Socrates makes a point about globalisation which does have a bearing on the basis of how stocks are traded, but not on the reason why they are traded.

Human nature, which is what you're ultimately trading, has not changed in the last century to any degree that could invalidate Wyckoff's work.

 

[Over the Top]

Whatever "diamonds" there may be in the other thread are in plain view, and could have been discussed were it not for the superciliousness which descends like a wet blanket over most any thread which attracts Socrates' attention.

Interesting perspective. As I read those words the phrase "Bindweed of the Boards" came to mind. Bit like a phantom of the opera, but without any real entertainment value.

Question for SOCRATES: Socrates, did you ever used to hang out in Guernsey? We may have met.

Hope I haven't inadvertently used the 'G' word. I note Gibraltar got pulled rather quickly.

 

[dbphoenix]

Some of you may be interested in the following:

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/showpost.php?p=219070&postcount=677

 

[SOCRATES]

Which you may munch if you like. But there's no evidence to suggest that trader behavior has changed since the era in which these principles were explored by Wyckoff, Livermore et al (and which were lifted by Williams, whom Socrates quotes so freely in the other thread, though primarily those quotes which focus on ridicule, derision, and the general condescension toward anyone who isn't Williams or Socrates, as the case may be).

Whatever "diamonds" there may be in the other thread are in plain view, and could have been discussed were it not for the superciliousness which descends like a wet blanket over most any thread which attracts Socrates' attention. Since Socrates has done his best to drive away those few who might polish them up a bit, they may well just sit there, in which case Socrates will be free to go on further about how stupid everyone is.

But have a nice day, anyway.

--Db

What are you grumbling about now ?

The quotes in the other thread are very real and have been repeated to me personally by him many times. I am merely quoting what he says in his own words because they are relevant to his methods and his own thought processes, and may help all of you to shed light on the angles from which he approaches all of this.

The diamond, is not in the other thread. The diamond is here in this thread. "it is screaming at you". But no one seems to notice the significance of the obvious, however obvious it is.

And so I leave you to carry on with this.

And you have a nice day too.

 

[barjon]

Excellently put charliechan.

Moderation is a thankless task. As it should be. After all, moderators choose to moderate for their own gratifications and satisfactions. Maybe not just power and control in all cases, but it does manifest itself that way plainly in some.

Maybe if all the moderators got together and decided what else they wanted in the guidelines for the site it would be easier. They could decide between them what they want from the site on any given day, time of day, direction of wind and prevailing whim of the moment. Prospective registrants to the site could then wade through the hundreds of pages of restrictive, prescriptive pronouncements of what the moderators feel is 'of use' or 'of interest' or 'entertaining' and decide for themselves if reading, let alone posting on such a site was worth the trouble of registering.

The need for guidelines is clear and should be adhered to in all cases. It is that the vast majority of post deletions, threats of and actual thread closures and even some member bannings appear to be quite outside the remit of the moderators based on the published guidelines.

It would be far better for all concerned, moderators and members alike if the moderators either backed off their heavy-handed censorial approach to moderating these boards and stuck to the guidelines in execution of their role or made the guidelines comprehensively cover their particular personal requirements as and when they change from moment to moment.

ott

You may wonder - but we do try to moderate in accordance with the published guidelines and not from any personal standpoint.

It is perhaps worth saying that this thread was started by a moderator by extracting some posts from the Tom Williams and volume tells all threads on the Price Volume board. The reason was because the personal nature of the exchanges were taking the threads off-topic. That it why it was entitled VSATrader/Socrates discussion and put in the foyer.

It was almost bound to become somewhat contentious and so somewhat looser moderation was allowed unless things got out of hand - which they did, a bit, hence the moderation.

This was never intended as a thread about volume spread analysis - threads on that are on the price and volume board.

Cheers

jon

 

[frugi]

Quite so Jon.

DB I'm sorry if my post #162 came across as derisive of Wyckoff's / Tom W's / your (?) methods, that was not my intention at all. I meant to put a question mark after "there", in fact, as I lack the expertise to know whether Socrates' view is correct or not, although conversations I've had with another trader suggest that it might well be, at least to some extent.

However there was mention of a diamond and it was the only post I could see that might have contained something rather significant. I have probably completely missed the intended target as usual. I hope Socrates might say if this is the case.

Have a nice weekend too.

After all, moderators choose to moderate for their own gratifications and satisfactions. Maybe not just power and control in all cases, but it does manifest itself that way plainly in some.

Moderators rarely volunteer for the job. In my case I was kindly asked by Sharky if I would be prepared to do it, as opposed to my craving power and gratification. The job is generally boring and thankless as you say, but there certainly is satisfaction to be had in keeping the ship on course and removing the bad elements that sometimes try to scuttle it. Of course I have a personal interest in doing this as I am here to converse, learn and exchange ideas, and do not wish to see the opportunity to do so spoiled unecessarily, or those from whom we might gain greater understanding of the markets driven away.

 

[charliechan]

ott

You may wonder - but we do try to moderate in accordance with the published guidelines and not from any personal standpoint.

It is perhaps worth saying that this thread was started by a moderator by extracting some posts from the Tom Williams and volume tells all threads on the Price Volume board. The reason was because the personal nature of the exchanges were taking the threads off-topic. That it why it was entitled VSATrader/Socrates discussion and put in the foyer.

It was almost bound to become somewhat contentious and so somewhat looser moderation was allowed unless things got out of hand - which they did, a bit, hence the moderation.

This was never intended as a thread about volume spread analysis - threads on that are on the price and volume board.

Cheers

jon

and i was beginning to forget what the initial topic of the thread was!!

socrates - perhaps you can shed some light on what all the fuss was about in the first place? this may help resolve some of the issues here, and increase the understanding people have of the topic. this will surely stop people from coming to the wrong conclusions as they inevitably will.

you did mention a few pages back something about this. perhaps people may be able to see the situation between vsatrader and yourself from a different perspective.

just thought this could help everyone out. cooperation through clarity if you will.

otherwise, the whole situation will start to look as if one person is angry, but refuses to say why, only at whom. this can seem a little odd as i am sure you are aware.

i hope you dont mind this request - it is not intended to fan the flames.

 

[Bigbusiness]

I see pratbh has now been banned. Was this for his post about what Tom Williams thought of Socrates? I read it before it was deleted and it seemed to back up what VSA trader was saying. Or are people playing games here? Perhaps someone could email Tom Williams to get his opinion? Someone is lying here and it would be good to know who.

 

[frugi]

Pratbh was banned for two days in light of a comment that I felt went beyond the bounds of decency, simple as that.

 

[dc2000]

To Mods and T2W staff
I know some of the members myself included, who have asked questions of Soc and his methods, have been viewed as disruptive and yes have sailed close to the wind with some of the posts but there is something not quite right here surely posting that a member is a dunce, an idiot or a creature from under a stone is the same as those comments that have been deleted for being not in line with the boards policy of decency.

I would also like to add that when I see comments like

This is because the object ot the original thread was to discover the bias in how individuals who have the correct faculties are divided away from those who have not, and to properly channel those at the correct level of personal awareness.

This is like the aspiration of ordinary military personnel, ore even civilians, may have to being admitted to a Special Forces Unit. Many can aspire, but very few succeed, and even fewer pass selection and can be admitted.

this does worry me this board is an open BB that attracts a lot of new traders who quite often are coming here for support and to learn, it is not about becoming an elitist us and them club for the chosen few.

 

[counter_violent]

To Mods and T2W staff
I know some of the members myself included, who have asked questions of Soc and his methods, have been viewed as disruptive and yes have sailed close to the wind with some of the posts but there is something not quite right here surely posting that a member is a dunce, an idiot or a creature from under a stone is the same as those comments that have been deleted for being not in line with the boards policy of decency.

I would also like to add that when I see comments like


this does worry me this board is an open BB that attracts a lot of new traders who quite often are coming here for support and to learn, it is not about becoming an elitist us and them club for the chosen few.

Quite so, but then there are double standards everywhere in life !

 

[dsn]

T2W,

I have no wish to stir up further trouble but there is something that is bugging me and I must ask. It relates to a question asked earlier in this thread, and I would like a member of the T2W staff to answer if possible.

Other than posting on the forums, does Socrates have, or has he ever had an involvement with the T2W organisation in any way?

As I generally only follow trading related posts I may be off the pace here - but having witnessed Socrates' conduct (and treatment) since he joined the site, and today followed up some comments made on this thread I just feel that there is a very bad smell about all of this.

There are a number of references on the boards, but pages 3 to 7 of the attached extract from a post by Sharky gets to the core of what I personally do not like one bit. I am aware of the skilful and ongoing manipulation of the boards by vendors. Some are not so smart and are quickly dealt with by the community - others are cleverer. One can always be dismissive of those who are stupid (?) enough to part with serious amounts of money, and they must take their share of responsibility - but to my mind there is no excuse for the kind of practices described in this particular story. It is important that T2W does not support such activity, unwittingly or otherwise.

 

[Bigbusiness]

I think Socrates made enough money in the 90's charging people £5,000 for his special treatment. I found this from 1998:-

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/alt.invest/msg/e50ecdbe13bfab02

I find a lot of Socrates posts are quite patronising and it does get a bit tedious being treated like a 4 year old. It is just his way but I do think it has put some people off TTW. We seem to have lost a lot of people who used to make regular contributions. Perhaps it is just a coincidence and I know some people were big supporters of Socrates but I just think TTW was so much better 18 months ago, before we had the pleasure of Socrates company.

I think it is sad that Socrates has received abuse from some otherwise polite people but we don't all have his excellent command of the English language and some people just seem to snap when they receive some of his "polite rudeness". Perhaps a ban for those patronising other members should be imposed. I find that more offensive than some of the retaliatory posts.

 

[counter_violent]

T2W,

I have no wish to stir up further trouble but there is something that is bugging me and I must ask. It relates to a question asked earlier in this thread, and I would like a member of the T2W staff to answer if possible.

Other than posting on the forums, does Socrates have, or has he ever had an involvement with the T2W organisation in any way?

As I generally only follow trading related posts I may be off the pace here - but having witnessed Socrates' conduct (and treatment) since he joined the site, and today followed up some comments made on this thread I just feel that there is a very bad smell about all of this.

There are a number of references on the boards, but pages 3 to 7 of the attached extract from a post by Sharky gets to the core of what I personally do not like one bit. I am aware of the skilful and ongoing manipulation of the boards by vendors. Some are not so smart and are quickly dealt with by the community - others are cleverer. One can always be dismissive of those who are stupid (?) enough to part with serious amounts of money, and they must take their share of responsibility - but to my mind there is no excuse for the blatant extortion of money under false pretences. It is important that T2W does not support such activity, unwittingly or otherwise.

This is priceless. :arrowu:

From a previous time.

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/showthread.php?t=12083&page=6&pp=10&highlight=albert

This gets going after page 28

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=219110

 

[dc2000]

This is priceless

Forget diamonds this things a larger Gem than "The Star of India"

 

[Quenkish]

T2W,

I have no wish to stir up further trouble but there is something that is bugging me and I must ask. It relates to a question asked earlier in this thread, and I would like a member of the T2W staff to answer if possible.

Other than posting on the forums, does Socrates have, or has he ever had an involvement with the T2W organisation in any way?

As I generally only follow trading related posts I may be off the pace here - but having witnessed Socrates' conduct (and treatment) since he joined the site, and today followed up some comments made on this thread I just feel that there is a very bad smell about all of this.

There are a number of references on the boards, but pages 3 to 7 of the attached extract from a post by Sharky gets to the core of what I personally do not like one bit. I am aware of the skilful and ongoing manipulation of the boards by vendors. Some are not so smart and are quickly dealt with by the community - others are cleverer. One can always be dismissive of those who are stupid (?) enough to part with serious amounts of money, and they must take their share of responsibility - but to my mind there is no excuse for the blatant extortion of money under false pretences. It is important that T2W does not support such activity, unwittingly or otherwise.

The main complaint that I have about t2w is that their are too many vendors lurking in the background. It can be quite difficult to distinguish between who is a REAL trader & who is a vendor, you will soon learn how to do it. The REAL traders are a treasure who can answer many questions that you may have, they make t2w a great site.

As for Socrates I don`t have a problem with him (if anyone does I suggest that they just ignore him), there are many worse people than him on ET another favourite of mine. What does concern me is when certain members have been banned for disagreeing with him.

 

[nobrainer]

I remember that Sunday Times article about Socrates.5k a time, not bad! Did his devotees ever make any money?Are any still around to enlighten us?Indeed is Socrates still running his courses?
Its amazing how many people on T2W are peddling some course or the other(not suggesting Mr.Labos is naturally).I suppose its far easier fleecing some idiot mug of his money than trading for yourself. Way of the world.